:(
posted by paulhem at 08:31 P.M. EST on Mon Apr 09, 2007 #
How sad. The Blade is to be commended for the quick and appropriate response.
posted by holland at 09:29 P.M. EST on Mon Apr 09, 2007 #
I guess some might be concerned about a slippery slope here blurring reality...but it's just some removed legs and this guys was nominated for a Pulitzer at one point. Sounds like a lot of overreacting to me.
posted by thetoledowire_com at 09:51 P.M. EST on Mon Apr 09, 2007 #
I'm with thetoledowire_com on the POSSIBILITY of the whole "slippery slope" thing but can we take a breather here for a second? It's a pair of feet. If the rest of Detrich's work is found to be on the up and up, this is gonna be the most ridiculous, time-wasting investigation since Capt. Queeg went after the pilfered strawberries in "The Caine Mutiny." A career had to end because of this? I could see if he'd removed or added people from the prayer huddle, but jesus...what a waste of time and money on The Blade's part.
posted by MT1973 at 10:50 P.M. EST on Mon Apr 09, 2007 #
I can see two points of view on this one.
Had those legs NOT been standing behind an important banner, any sensible photo editor would've just cropped that whole section of the photo out, much like centering a photo around a subject by cropping off an extraneous tree or a parked car or something. And no one would have a dang thing to say about it. Losing the legs did not alter any meaningful content in the photo.
Having said that, consider that journalists already suffer, among media consumers, a serious lack of confidence in their integrity. And Mr. Detrich's "oops" doesn't help a whole lot. I think -- just speculating here -- that any uproar is not over the content of the alteration but rather the fact that he'd do it in the first place, with any photo at any time.
An unfortunate case. I do hope that Mr. Detrich's resignation was truly self-motivated and that he wasn't bullied into it.
posted by jmleong at 12:17 A.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
I worked with Alan on a project years ago and know him to be a very professional and detail oriented man. If Alan says he inadvertantly submitted one he'd changed for his own personal uses, then you can take that to the bank.
I hope this doesnt turn into some kind of ridiculous witch hunt that the Blade is so famous for.
posted by billy at 07:25 A.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
That is such a shame -- I hope Mr. Detrich was not forced to resign. He's been a name associated with the Blade for a long time. His talents will be missed.
--Mike
posted by miked918 at 08:02 A.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
This is the way I look at it:
He was an experienced photographer. He would have been aware that other photographers were standing near him snapping shots from the same angle. To intentionally submit a doctored photo knowing that there would be other professional versions from the same angle would be completely foolish on his part.
In that regard, I have no trouble believing his story stating that the photo was doctored for personal use only and was transmitted to the Blade by accident. With all his years of experience, surely he would have realized that doing something like that intentionally would not go unnoticed. I can't imagine someone with the career he's had intentionally throwing it out the window for a pair of legs under a banner.
posted by mom2 at 08:37 A.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
I'd sure be happier if I heard anything from the Blade saying they'd stand behind their man until this is settled.
Im not seeing that tho.
posted by billy at 09:50 A.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
Detrich's April 5 blog posting :
"I was covering the Bluffton Baseball tragedy, and I have written about numerous times in my Blog. I shot a beautiful photo of the team praying in left field, near the banners containing the numbers and names of the Bluffton ball players that were victims of a bus accident in Atlanta, GA. I had been covering this tragedy day-in and day-out for three weeks, with uncounted hours of overtime. The above mentioned photo really struck me. I made a version of the photo, cloning out the legs for my personal use only, so I could make a large panoramic print for my office, to remember this emotional story. This would hang beside a photo from my "Children of the Underground" series and numerous tornado photos."
"I copied the photo into a folder on my computer called "Keepers". My mistake began here. I should have killed out the altered photo out of my transmission folder, at this point. I did not. The folder also held all of the 16 toned photos I sent back to the paper that day from my truck. The folder also contained an un-altered version of the praying photo, toned and captioned for transmission. The cloned photo was even saved at its highest resolution, so it would print nicely. The one toned for transmission was sized at 10 inches by 200 DPI, the size we transmit to the paper."
"While transmitting on deadline, I sent the wrong photo, plain and simple. I made a huge mistake, and I have expressed my regrets to my editors at the Blade. It is something that will never happen again. I have been with the Blade since 1989 and have never been disciplined for anything in my career. I was on the road with my wife for a long need date the next day, so I never saw the paper. If I would have seen that, it would have been something I would have brought up to my editors."
posted by jr at 04:58 P.M. EST on Tue Apr 10, 2007 #
OHMYGOD!
HE DIGITALLY REMOVED THE LEGS FROM A PHOTO!
TRYING TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC!
NOW THAT I'VE SEEN THE 'REAL' PHOTO, IT TELLS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STORY!
GET THE ROPE OUT, FELLAS, AND FIND THE CLOSEST OAK TREE!
WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO!
SumBitch! The guy makes an insignificant alteration and the Blah lynches him, but yet the Blah BREAKS FEDERAL LAW with their lockout and claims innocence!
Block, you are a piece of work!
You're another one I wouldn't pull my weapon to protect! (Of course, you wouldn't want me to anyway, since you're against the CCW law!)
posted by Plantman at 08:35 A.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Plantman:
Don't blame Block! There is a standard of ethics at NPPA's News Photographer magazine.
Detrich has ethics!
posted by billhaw at 09:12 A.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Come on Plantman. Accidental or otherwise, a doctored photo is just that, a doctored photo. Whether or not the alteration changes the message conveyed by the photo does not matter. How could The Blade, or the reader, trust the content of any photo to convey the complete unvarnished circumstances of the moment captured if photographers were permitted to make alterations? What The Blade did was correct. There has been quite a lot of controversy about the ease with which digital photos can be altered and the effect on photo journalism and journalism as a whole. Dietrich, as a long time pro, was well aware of the expected standards. My question is why did he doctor the photo at all? Of what value was it and to whom in an altered state? I have often been a critic of The Blade, but they got this one just right.
posted by holland at 09:51 A.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
"My question is why did he doctor the photo at all? Of what value was it and to whom in an altered state?"
holland, Detrich explained why on his blog last week, and I posted his words above. He said :
"The above mentioned photo really struck me. I made a version of the photo, cloning out the legs for my personal use only, so I could make a large panoramic print for my office, to remember this emotional story. This would hang beside a photo from my "Children of the Underground" series and numerous tornado photos."
According to Detrich, he simply submitted the wrong version for use in the paper.
posted by jr at 10:25 A.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Ok jr, I get it but, sorry, I'm not buying it.
posted by holland at 02:03 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Not buying what? If it wasn't for personal use to hang on his wall, why remove the legs from the photo? The photo looks better without the legs.
Removing the legs for the paper version does not push an agenda of some kind. And since this was an event covered by many media people, others would get the same photo with the legs. So if Detrich had some evil motive for removing the legs, he would get caught, which is what happened.
Seems if he had evil intentions, he would choose an event where he was the only photographer.
posted by jr at 03:58 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Your logic is sound jr, but I still can't get comfortable with the explanation. Me, I wouldn't want a doctored photo displayed anywhere that was also jounalistically published unaltered - a professional separation of art from journalism. This is a case of what "is" is, not what's stylistically better. My comfort level is not at all important though. For whatever reason, he screwed up and it should not have happened.
posted by holland at 04:58 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Still and all, 27 years with the blade - a Pulitzer nomination, and not one kind word about him from the blade??
Not one 'Allen has been such a good friend and valuable asset to the paper' comment?
How quickly this poor guys friends backpedal and abandon him.
F*ckin cowardly, if you ask me. Because even if he NEVER comes back, I'd bet my bottom dollar that they'll still count his pulitzer nomination in their ongoing tally!
posted by billy at 06:26 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
Blade assistant managing editor for administration Luann Sharp said :
"We owe it to our readers to complete a thorough review in order to determine if there have been any other photos that were altered prior to publication in our newspaper. Once we have completed that review, we will let our readers know what we found. We expect to complete our investigation this week."
Resigning over a one-time accident, involving the removal of a pair of legs from a photo doesn't make sense. I want to see what the Blade's investigation turns up.
"Asked if the Blade would find other examples of manipulation in his work as part of its investigation, Detrich said, "I don't know what they're going to find. I've put that behind me." "
Isn't that a strange response? I would have thought he would have said something like, "They won't find anything."
posted by jr at 07:25 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
The part that struck me was that he had moved on to another field completely unrelated to photography. But, you are right, his response is odd.
posted by holland at 07:46 P.M. EST on Wed Apr 11, 2007 #
I was dumbfounded when I heard about this. The change makes no difference in the photo at all, other than neatness. Big effing deal, talk about overreacting.
posted by JeepMaker at 08:47 P.M. EST on Thu Apr 12, 2007 #
As fgar as it being a "doctored" photo, again, big damn deal. The Blade slants news stories all the time, which is worse?
posted by JeepMaker at 08:50 P.M. EST on Thu Apr 12, 2007 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
